It has just not been Jamie Dimon's day... or week. After a lawsuit earlier in the week implicated his firm in a mortgage scandal for selling "sack of shit" loans, which is very reminiscent of what Goldman did to AIG, the JPM boss had hoped that he could spin his lies and get everyone to forget that he and his klepocratic colleagues virtually destroyed the financial system, and net a reduction in supervision and regulation. After all the banks have been in purgatory where they have had to subsist on bonuses that average just over $300k for JPM (and $400k for Goldman): how on earth are they supposed to do that. During a Davos session Dimon lashed out at persistent bank bashing nearly three years after the global credit crisis began, saying it was "unproductive and unfair.. Not all banks are the same and I just think that this constant refrain 'bankers, bankers, bankers' is just unproductive and unfair. People should just stop doing that." Enter Nicolas Sarkozy, who more so than anyone is concerned by the events in Tunisia and Egypt, considering an increasing percentage of the French population is of North African descent, and quite soon they may decide to do just what their Tunisian (and after tomorrow, Egyptian) brethren have done, and just get rid of their useless president.
Quote Sarkozy talking to Dimon, per Reuters:
"The world has paid with tens of millions of unemployed, who were in no way to blame and who paid for everything. It caused a lot of anger. Too much is too much. The world was stupefied to see one of five biggest U.S. banks collapse like a house of cards. We saw that for the last 10 years, major institutions in which we thought we could trust had done things which had nothing to do with simple common sense. That's what happened... There is an ocean between flexibility and the scandal we saw. So if people present me as obsessed with regulation, it's because there is a need for regulation. I don't contest the principle of securitisation, but when one offshore country guaranteed 700 times its GDP, are we in the market economy or in a madhouse? Bonuses don't bother me, provided there are also ... draw-downs when there are losses. When things don't work, you can never find anyone responsible. Those who got bumper bonuses for seven years should have made losses in 2008 when things collapsed."
Wow. This could rival the best rant any angry blogger could come up with.
And Jamie's second attempt to make it seem like his feces don't stink suffered massive failure:
Not all banks needed that TARP. Not all banks would have failed," Dimon said at the earlier session. "A lot of banks were stabilising the problem -- JP Morgan bought Bear Stearns because the U.S. asked us to."
Too bad that earlier today, as part of the FCIC disclosure we got the following revelation from none other then Chairprinter Shalom-Packard himself:
"If you look at the firms that came under pressure in that period ... only one ... was not at serious risk of failure. Even Goldman Sachs, we thought there was a real chance that they would go under."
Sorry Jamie. Mission to get you to run the world all over again has experienced massive failure... for now.